I wonder if Shahid or Tony

[perry geyton]

Had a word with Marco about his temper/passion after the Man Utd. Game ?

Or does he just accept it as a personality trait

I'd be curios to know, same applies to Mitrovic

[hovewhite]

Think it will be mentioned by them.

[filham]

The three red cards is a club crisis and the Chairman can't just ignore it, he really should be doing something to get the ship back on course. Perhaps he thinks it best to keep quiet until the enquiry announces the fines.

[Southcoastffc]

The three red cards is a club crisis and the Chairman can't just ignore it, he really should be doing something to get the ship back on course. Perhaps he thinks it best to keep quiet until the enquiry announces the fines.

Calm down. It's unfortunate,  nowhere near a crisis.

[Cambridge Away]

I don't think the red cards were a total loss. It was like we were realistic and gave up on the battle, but the bigger picture is Fulham will win the war. Referees will think twice about being biased towards the masses (over us) in future. It also creates even more of a seige mentality in the squad. The only downside is we are without Mitro for a few games. But it was good to see him announce his comeback in style!  064.gif

[perry geyton]

Maybe just a text
"Marco calm down"

[David Allen Crankshaw]

I'm quite certain Shahid Khan has had a word with Marco Silva. Having saved our club he wont be happy with the antics of certain individuals.

[Arthur]

I don't think the red cards were a total loss. It was like we were realistic and gave up on the battle, but the bigger picture is Fulham will win the war. Referees will think twice about being biased towards the masses (over us) in future.

Sometimes, post-match, I go to the fans' forum of our opponents to get their views of the game. An opinion held fairly widely, I would say, among supporters of provincial clubs in the Championship is that Fulham receive preferential treatment from referees when we are in that league because we are a London club. I've read comments along the lines of: 'if that had been us (i.e. our opponents), that goal would have been disallowed'; or 'if that had happened at the other end, the ref gives Fulham a penalty'; they're the same sort of remarks I read on here to do with the 'big' clubs in the P.L. and ourselves. While we, on this forum, don't give a second thought to our three promotions from the Championship being anything other than on merit, there are fans of other clubs who believe we were helped on our way by biased decision-making.

My reason for posting this is to make the point that referees no more deliberately favour the top clubs in the P.L. than they do us when we are in the Championship. They do their best but they make mistakes. Moreover, they know, in my opinion, that a bad error in a match involving a promotion-chasing Fulham side will likely receive more media coverage than it would were it, say, Preston or Hull. Of course, one of the qualities supporters might hope of match officials at the level of professional football is that they will make the same decisions under greater pressure as they would under less pressure. Nevertheless, I'm sure all of us have been in situations where our actions or decisions were open to more damaging scrutiny than usual. How many of us can say the extra weight upon our shoulders had no effect upon our judgment?

[Black, White and Fred]

I think that the club is clearly managing the matter privately, hence no public apology. I think it's the right way to go about it. They may see that coming out and taking blame will justify any trumpeted up bans the FA might fancy dishing out

[Rupert]

My reason for posting this is to make the point that referees no more deliberately favour the top clubs in the P.L. than they do us when we are in the Championship. They do their best but they make mistakes. Moreover, they know, in my opinion, that a bad error in a match involving a promotion-chasing Fulham side will likely receive more media coverage than it would were it, say, Preston or Hull. Of course, one of the qualities supporters might hope of match officials at the level of professional football is that they will make the same decisions under greater pressure as they would under less pressure. Nevertheless, I'm sure all of us have been in situations where our actions or decisions were open to more damaging scrutiny than usual. How many of us can say the extra weight upon our shoulders had no effect upon our judgment?

This is a perfectly valid point, however, you are describing the very reason we were told VAR exists. As I posted on a different thread, I can believe that the ref had a perfectly good view of the third minute push on Mitro, and his testicles shrivelled up in terror at the thought of having to give a penalty that early against United at home in any game, never mind in the last domestic competition they had any realistic chance of winning.
Lucky old him, and us, he could dodge the decision as VAR would swing into action and he could avoid taking the blame.
Except it did not.

I imagine the blatant failure of VAR in several matches this year when the "bigger" team has benefitted from the "errors", including us against West Ham, is forming quite an important part of Fulham's defence. The stuffed blazers at the FA want to peddle the lie that the refs are strictly neutral, and here are little Fulham threatening to blow the whistle. We have already seen United belatedly charged with failing to control their players. There will be some sort of compromise on the cards. We will be blamed. We will be fined. Marco and Mitro will both face bans. But I would not be surprised if we quietly notice VAR picking up on incidents against us rather more frequently. Or match officials being very, very careful when we play the big boys.
Time will tell.

[toshes mate]

When I was at school I was taught there is bias and BIAS, just as there is weather and WEATHER, religion and RELIGION, bs and BS etc.  The trick we have to learn, as it was explained to me as a kid, is to test your hypothesis in situations where you have no vested emotion, no pent up feeling, no invested interest etc. with what you regard as a 50-50 random outcome (since everything is ultimately random even when it has patterns we see e.g. Golden Ratios etc).     

It is somewhat crudely scientific when done in the head rather than on paper but its crudeness does help you see when a job is done well even if the product is not quite what the worker had in mind (i.e. the finished article is not perfection).  With practice you get pretty good at assessing other people and quickly understand the one's who are learning as compared to those who are not  The skill is knowing why a person is not achieving. 

In my computer programming days I could tell a promising coder from one who had no clue very quickly but then I knew coding inside out.  And there lies the rub - if I were a top professional sports official I'd know what it takes to make another top professional sports official but would I necessarly see what it takes in someone who has had bad teaching experiences on the journey that simply need correcting? 

Another Catch-22 is aping whereby people repeat what they have heard or read elsewhere because it is what they want to believe is true too. 

Actually teaching students and assessing are extremely hard work when done properly and a sizeable part of humanity doesn't want to work hard especially if they can make money with less effort because their particular society couldn't care less.  A part of football probab;y couldn't care less about getting stuff RIGHT (see above) because it is bloody hard work.

Consider why tennis, cricket, athletics and rugby successfully use video to make decisions and note it is mosly about very fine margins.  In football, however, it is about howlers that have been missed and  burning people at the stake.  One is healthy and the other is not and that is what you need to consider when judging standards.     

[Black, White and Fred]

When I was at school I was taught there is bias and BIAS, just as there is weather and WEATHER, religion and RELIGION, bs and BS etc.  The trick we have to learn, as it was explained to me as a kid, is to test your hypothesis in situations where you have no vested emotion, no pent up feeling, no invested interest etc. with what you regard as a 50-50 random outcome (since everything is ultimately random even when it has patterns we see e.g. Golden Ratios etc).     

It is somewhat crudely scientific when done in the head rather than on paper but its crudeness does help you see when a job is done well even if the product is not quite what the worker had in mind (i.e. the finished article is not perfection).  With practice you get pretty good at assessing other people and quickly understand the one's who are learning as compared to those who are not  The skill is knowing why a person is not achieving. 

In my computer programming days I could tell a promising coder from one who had no clue very quickly but then I knew coding inside out.  And there lies the rub - if I were a top professional sports official I'd know what it takes to make another top professional sports official but would I necessarly see what it takes in someone who has had bad teaching experiences on the journey that simply need correcting? 

Another Catch-22 is aping whereby people repeat what they have heard or read elsewhere because it is what they want to believe is true too. 

Actually teaching students and assessing are extremely hard work when done properly and a sizeable part of humanity doesn't want to work hard especially if they can make money with less effort because their particular society couldn't care less.  A part of football probab;y couldn't care less about getting stuff RIGHT (see above) because it is bloody hard work.

Consider why tennis, cricket, athletics and rugby successfully use video to make decisions and note it is mosly about very fine margins.  In football, however, it is about howlers that have been missed and  burning people at the stake.  One is healthy and the other is not and that is what you need to consider when judging standards.     

Cricket style appeal system would surely help with the use of hot microphones like in rugby? At least then when a manager challenges the incident is reviewed then the bias would be more apparent as we would hear the way the decision was reviewed.

[bobbo]

My reason for posting this is to make the point that referees no more deliberately favour the top clubs in the P.L. than they do us when we are in the Championship. They do their best but they make mistakes. Moreover, they know, in my opinion, that a bad error in a match involving a promotion-chasing Fulham side will likely receive more media coverage than it would were it, say, Preston or Hull. Of course, one of the qualities supporters might hope of match officials at the level of professional football is that they will make the same decisions under greater pressure as they would under less pressure. Nevertheless, I'm sure all of us have been in situations where our actions or decisions were open to more damaging scrutiny than usual. How many of us can say the extra weight upon our shoulders had no effect upon our judgment?

This is a perfectly valid point, however, you are describing the very reason we were told VAR exists. As I posted on a different thread, I can believe that the ref had a perfectly good view of the third minute push on Mitro, and his testicles shrivelled up in terror at the thought of having to give a penalty that early against United at home in any game, never mind in the last domestic competition they had any realistic chance of winning.
Lucky old him, and us, he could dodge the decision as VAR would swing into action and he could avoid taking the blame.
Except it did not.

I imagine the blatant failure of VAR in several matches this year when the "bigger" team has benefitted from the "errors", including us against West Ham, is forming quite an important part of Fulham's defence. The stuffed blazers at the FA want to peddle the lie that the refs are strictly neutral, and here are little Fulham threatening to blow the whistle. We have already seen United belatedly charged with failing to control their players. There will be some sort of compromise on the cards. We will be blamed. We will be fined. Marco and Mitro will both face bans. But I would not be surprised if we quietly notice VAR picking up on incidents against us rather more frequently. Or match officials being very, very careful when we play the big boys.
Time will tell.

well said Rupert I echo your words.

[Fulham Tup North]

Cricket style appeal system would surely help with the use of hot microphones like in rugby? At least then when a manager challenges the incident is reviewed then the bias would be more apparent as we would hear the way the decision was reviewed.
[/quote]
..and if the Refs were mic'd up, they would stop their swearing .. especially if they knew it was an automatic ban.. even for one game... it's ok with players showing passion but they also need some self discipline....
Couple of years in the Army wouldn't hurt them 🤣🤣👍

[filham]

I don't think the red cards were a total loss. It was like we were realistic and gave up on the battle, but the bigger picture is Fulham will win the war. Referees will think twice about being biased towards the masses (over us) in future.

Sometimes, post-match, I go to the fans' forum of our opponents to get their views of the game. An opinion held fairly widely, I would say, among supporters of provincial clubs in the Championship is that Fulham receive preferential treatment from referees when we are in that league because we are a London club. I've read comments along the lines of: 'if that had been us (i.e. our opponents), that goal would have been disallowed'; or 'if that had happened at the other end, the ref gives Fulham a penalty'; they're the same sort of remarks I read on here to do with the 'big' clubs in the P.L. and ourselves. While we, on this forum, don't give a second thought to our three promotions from the Championship being anything other than on merit, there are fans of other clubs who believe we were helped on our way by biased decision-making.

My reason for posting this is to make the point that referees no more deliberately favour the top clubs in the P.L. than they do us when we are in the Championship. They do their best but they make mistakes. Moreover, they know, in my opinion, that a bad error in a match involving a promotion-chasing Fulham side will likely receive more media coverage than it would were it, say, Preston or Hull. Of course, one of the qualities supporters might hope of match officials at the level of professional football is that they will make the same decisions under greater pressure as they would under less pressure. Nevertheless, I'm sure all of us have been in situations where our actions or decisions were open to more damaging scrutiny than usual. How many of us can say the extra weight upon our shoulders had no effect upon our judgment?

Good post Arthur, I agree with you.
I would just add that football is struggling with technology, VAR is not helping with disputes other than perhaps with offside decisions where big toes and a nose can make a difference.

[FFCBadger]

Maybe just a text
"Marco calm down"

I would recommend this approach. Good question though?
You've probably got to say something but he's been nailing it...

[Somerset Fulham]

Well said Alfie.  There aren't any agendas or consipracies, its just human error a lot of the time.

We will hear 'whatabout Klopp' or 'whatabout Arteta', but I also read other fans forums and the general concesnsus that I see is that Marco is a bit of a tw@t really.  I do'n't think that one bit but I can see why his antics will annoy other fans, he does need to wind it in.

[alfie]

Well said Alfie.  There aren't any agendas or consipracies, its just human error a lot of the time.

We will hear 'whatabout Klopp' or 'whatabout Arteta', but I also read other fans forums and the general concesnsus that I see is that Marco is a bit of a tw@t really.  I do'n't think that one bit but I can see why his antics will annoy other fans, he does need to wind it in.

What did I say?

[perry geyton]

Well said Alfie.  There aren't any agendas or consipracies, its just human error a lot of the time.

We will hear 'whatabout Klopp' or 'whatabout Arteta', but I also read other fans forums and the general concesnsus that I see is that Marco is a bit of a tw@t really.  I do'n't think that one bit but I can see why his antics will annoy other fans, he does need to wind it in.

Big clubs definitely get decisions, that's no conspiracy, refs are intimidated by the big clubs 100%

many a conspiracy theory has come true, especially over the past few years..... and I'm not just talking football either....

[Ruislip White]

I don't think the red cards were a total loss. It was like we were realistic and gave up on the battle, but the bigger picture is Fulham will win the war. Referees will think twice about being biased towards the masses (over us) in future.

Sometimes, post-match, I go to the fans' forum of our opponents to get their views of the game. An opinion held fairly widely, I would say, among supporters of provincial clubs in the Championship is that Fulham receive preferential treatment from referees when we are in that league because we are a London club. I've read comments along the lines of: 'if that had been us (i.e. our opponents), that goal would have been disallowed'; or 'if that had happened at the other end, the ref gives Fulham a penalty'; they're the same sort of remarks I read on here to do with the 'big' clubs in the P.L. and ourselves. While we, on this forum, don't give a second thought to our three promotions from the Championship being anything other than on merit, there are fans of other clubs who believe we were helped on our way by biased decision-making.

My reason for posting this is to make the point that referees no more deliberately favour the top clubs in the P.L. than they do us when we are in the Championship. They do their best but they make mistakes. Moreover, they know, in my opinion, that a bad error in a match involving a promotion-chasing Fulham side will likely receive more media coverage than it would were it, say, Preston or Hull. Of course, one of the qualities supporters might hope of match officials at the level of professional football is that they will make the same decisions under greater pressure as they would under less pressure. Nevertheless, I'm sure all of us have been in situations where our actions or decisions were open to more damaging scrutiny than usual. How many of us can say the extra weight upon our shoulders had no effect upon our judgment?

Great post and some other decent points on this thread about cricket style appeals and refs feeling more intimated at bigger grounds.  As frustrating as refs can be (inconsistency being probably the most annoying thing), they are human.  We all make mistakes and it's fair to say that none of us get everything right in our day jobs.  They are sometimes let down by VAR, but I don't think there is a big club/small club bias here (I recall Brentford robbing Arsenal this month for example despite vAR).
For those that want to call refs c#### and cheats etc, I'd suggest taking a moment to reflect on how you'd feel if every time you made a mistake at work, people called you the same - then magnify that by thousands of strangers.  It's poor.